Slitherine

In a scenario I was in the situation where I had no heavy tank capable of taking out a Tiger I, just Mk1 Shermans. Despite battering it with artillery for a few rounds it made no difference and none of the Shermans could touch it. This was playing on Limited Dice Chess, which I think gives more realistic results than purely random ones (since having one BA-64 knock out 5 Tigers in one go).

Without aircraft there seemed no way to dispatch the Tiger, while in turn it could take out up to 6 Shermans with impunity. I retreated back to a line with infantry support but could only knock out 1 Tiger per round - that's if it didn't trundle off seeking other prey.

Shermans get quite poor armour rating in the game. It's rated the same as a Somua S35 which I believe was a similarly sloped casting but only 45mm thick, (and probably should be a point or two higher anyway). The early Sherman gun HA is probably a bit under-rated too, as the British reckoned that the 75mm of the Grants (which was no better than that of the Sherman) made a big difference against tanks. By the time you allow for experience (most of the tigers are 3* in Allied and US corps) you will be in for a tough time against even a single tiger, and even an experienced tank destroyer will take a big beating while inflicting not much damage.

Personally I try to avoid combat with later model German tanks as far as possible and use strategic bombers to strip ammo and fuel or try to hit them in bad terrain, with the tank destroyers and auxiliaries used to provide a picket line/speed bump for a bit of screening. This leaves the Shermans free to do what they do best - beat up soft targets and lightly armoured troops (and especially the 3* mobile AA), so that eventually the enemy has nothing but a few modern tanks. Of course you will take heavy casualties when you get caught, but the combination of strategic bombers and limited resupply in the desert means you can significantly slow down the heavy armour enough to make a difference.

OldFocker wrote:In a scenario I was in the situation where I had no heavy tank capable of taking out a Tiger I, just Mk1 Shermans. Despite battering it with artillery for a few rounds it made no difference and none of the Shermans could touch it. This was playing on Limited Dice Chess, which I think gives more realistic results than purely random ones (since having one BA-64 knock out 5 Tigers in one go)..

Historically, Canadian Sherman 75mm's blew up Michael Wittman's Tiger with shots through the side armour which proves it can be done.
In tactical wargaming it's called a "critical hit" against all the odds.
Dice chess largely removes the chance of lucky critical hits which is why lots of players (including me) avoid the dice chess option because it makes games boring and predictable.
If results occasionally look unrealistic they can be explained away, for example your BA-64 knocking out 5 Tigers might be because the Tiger commanders and/or drivers were unbuttoned and had their heads blown off by the BA's machinegun.
Hey grasshopper, what sage words of wisdom can you give us about the exciting unpredictability of combat and life in general?

PoorOldSpike wrote: Dice chess largely removes the chance of lucky critical hits which is why lots of players (including me) avoid the dice chess option because it makes games boring and predictable.

Why did you play PzC ?
You can play Roulette. Or Online Poker.
If you be LUCKY - you can win a game with your big brain

Of coz Eben-Emael was wonderful. And what ? Tactical turn-based wargame its not a game about LUCKY or Critical Shot.
Play Quake with lucky critical hits and will be happy

.....

Yrfin wrote:..You can play Roulette. Or Online Poker.
If you be LUCKY - you can win a game with your big brain

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I tell my wargame recruits- "Never rely on Lady Luck; we make our own luck!"..

PS- As a test nut and games analyst geek I couldn't resist doing the following test with normal random combat:
1- I placed 5 fresh fullstrength Sherman 75mms to have a go at a fresh fullstrength Tiger, (I left a gap for if he wants to retreat), and both sides were zero experience level.
Note the Sherman's appalling 1 to 6 predicted chance against the Tiger, sure it looks bad for the Shers, but hey that's war, we have to step up to the plate regardless..
I HAVE A RENDEZVOUS WITH DEATH by Alan Seeger
"I have a rendezvous with Death
At some disputed barricade,
When Spring comes back with rustling shade
And apple-blossoms fill the air--
I have a rendezvous with Death
When Spring brings back blue days and fair.
And To My Pledged Word Am True
I Shall Not Fail That Rendezvous"
Alan Seeger (1888-1916)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Seeger

2- After 3 turns of combat this is the situation, the Shermans are pretty beat up and the Tiger has been bled white.
In a real game both sides would probably withdraw at this point to replace losses, but I let the combat go on for another 2 turns, and all the Shermans were destroyed and the Tiger retreated, it's good for nothing now and could be picked off with an airstrike.
3- However I decide to put it out of its misery and send in this fresh wave of Shermans to finish it off, and it quickly died next turn.
"I hurt with cruelty those who would hurt me"-Archilocus (Greek mercenary 650 BC)

I suppose that's how the Allies won the war, they always had more stuff to keep feeding into the meatgrinder to keep the momentum going, notice the purchase costs of the tanks, Shermans were dirt cheap and jerry couldn't beat the numbers on every front..

"I want to impress on everyone that the bad times are over. Fresh divisions from the UK are now arriving in Egypt, together with ample reinforcements for our present Divisions. We have 300 to 400 Sherman new tanks coming and these are actually being unloaded at Suez now. Our mandate from the Prime Minister is to destroy the Axis forces in North Africa; I have seen it, written on half a sheet of notepaper. And it will be done."- Montgomery on assuming command of 8th Army
http://www.fieldmarshalmontgomery.com/s ... mmand.html

Summary- the test went as predicted with no surprises, namely 5x Sherman 75mms couldn't quite do the job, but nevertheless the Tiger was reduced to a skeleton and was out of the war until it could get replacements IF any were available.

Once again.
I think PzC its not a Computer Game about: "Montgomery accidentally kick ass Rommel".
Or otherwise whatever
And for Historical purpose: Tiger tanks never been in Libia. Only in Tunis.

Yrfin wrote:

PoorOldSpike wrote: Dice chess largely removes the chance of lucky critical hits which is why lots of players (including me) avoid the dice chess option because it makes games boring and predictable.

Why did you play PzC ?
You can play Roulette. Or Online Poker.
If you be LUCKY - you can win a game with your big brain

Of coz Eben-Emael was wonderful. And what ? Tactical turn-based wargame its not a game about LUCKY or Critical Shot.
Play Quake with lucky critical hits and will be happy

The reality is that luck adds SKILL to PzC. As this example illustrates, with luck turned off, you can leave your heavy tanks surrounded knowing that nothing can touch them. With luck turned off, you know exactly how many troops you need to take out a given enemy (especially once you know the scenario) so there is no need to consider reinforcements. With luck turned off you never have to rescue a unit that's in trouble.

OldFocker is amusing himself posting daily examples of things he thinks are unrealistic, all taken from a gameplay mode that was tacked on decades after this game was designed. There's really nothing to see here.

proline wrote:OldFocker is amusing himself posting daily examples of things he thinks are unrealistic, all taken from a gameplay mode that was tacked on decades after this game was designed. There's really nothing to see here.

Why don't you get lost. I'm tired of you ever chipping in with disparaging comments. Find someone else to annoy with your 'superior' knowledge.

proline wrote:

Yrfin wrote:

PoorOldSpike wrote: Dice chess largely removes the chance of lucky critical hits which is why lots of players (including me) avoid the dice chess option because it makes games boring and predictable.

Why did you play PzC ?
You can play Roulette. Or Online Poker.
If you be LUCKY - you can win a game with your big brain

Of coz Eben-Emael was wonderful. And what ? Tactical turn-based wargame its not a game about LUCKY or Critical Shot.
Play Quake with lucky critical hits and will be happy

The reality is that luck adds SKILL to PzC. As this example illustrates, with luck turned off, you can leave your heavy tanks surrounded knowing that nothing can touch them. With luck turned off, you know exactly how many troops you need to take out a given enemy (especially once you know the scenario) so there is no need to consider reinforcements. With luck turned off you never have to rescue a unit that's in trouble.

Don't confuse good luck (Crit Shot) with ability to assess a situation in a game.

Yrfin wrote:Don't confuse good luck (Crit Shot) with ability to assess a situation in a game.

The ability to assess a situation in game is trivial if the computer tells you the outcome of all possible combat in the area, which it does if you play full chess mode.

Of course its too hard because play allies corps without aircraft like play panzer corps without heavy tank. That tiger has no support anti air unit but still need several turns to take it down

use a bait behind a hill hex. For example, a useless tank unit you have, and put infantry close by. when the tiger move to the hill to kill your useless tank unit, take it out with infantry. (hill or forest or any hex bad for tanks)